TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal Upholds CIT(A)'s Decisions on Income Tax Act</h1> <h3>Income Tax Officer Versus M/s Keshriyaji Minerals Pvt. Ltd.</h3> Income Tax Officer Versus M/s Keshriyaji Minerals Pvt. Ltd. - TMI Issues:1. Deletion of addition under section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.2. Deletion of disallowance of excess depreciation on dumpers.Deletion of Addition under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961:The first issue in this appeal pertains to the deletion of an addition made by the Assessing Officer under section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer disallowed an amount paid to a party for job work charges, citing non-deduction of TDS. The assessee contended that TDS was not required as there was no regular contract and the payment was for business transactions, not covered under the definition of a work contract. The CIT(A) deleted the addition, noting that all job charges were paid with nothing remaining payable by the year-end. The CIT(A) relied on judicial decisions stating that TDS provisions are not applicable to amounts already paid during the previous year without TDS deduction. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, emphasizing the absence of any contract and no outstanding payments, in line with previous judicial rulings.Deletion of Disallowance of Excess Depreciation on Dumpers:The second issue concerns the disallowance of excess depreciation claimed on dumpers by the Assessing Officer. The assessee claimed depreciation at 30%, while the allowable rate was 15%. The Assessing Officer contended that the assessee was entitled to depreciation at 15% only, citing that dumpers were not in the nature of lorries but earth-moving machinery. The CIT(A) allowed the depreciation claim at 30%, following a jurisdictional Tribunal decision. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, stating that there was no evidence to suggest a reversal of the Tribunal's previous ruling. The Tribunal found no merit in the Department's appeal regarding the depreciation disallowance on dumpers.In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the Department's appeal, upholding the decisions of the CIT(A) regarding both the deletion of the addition under section 40(a)(ia) and the disallowance of excess depreciation on dumpers. The Tribunal's decision was based on the absence of contracts, no outstanding payments, and adherence to previous judicial rulings and Tribunal decisions.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
